Ukraine: ICJ stresses the need for security of lawyers and an independent legal profession

Ukraine: ICJ stresses the need for security of lawyers and an independent legal profession

Following its mission to Ukraine on 4-8 March, the ICJ has called on the Ukrainian authorities to take urgent steps to ensure the physical safety of lawyers and to bring to justice those responsible for a series of violent attacks against them.

During its visit, the ICJ delegation heard consistent testimony of attacks on lawyers by private persons, ranging from acts of intimidation to use of firearms against them.

Several lawyers have been attacked physically and verbally by individuals or organized groups, including in court. At least six lawyers have recently been killed in relation to the exercise of their professional duties.

These attacks take place in an environment where legislative reforms directed at governance of the legal profession, which would have grave consequences for freedom of association and the functioning of the bar association and civil society, have been proposed by the Presidential Administration without consultation with lawyers.

Without urgent and significant efforts to prevent attacks and combat impunity, the independence of the legal profession, and the ability of lawyers to protect human rights, will be increasingly jeopardized, the ICJ concluded at the end of its mission to the country.

It is of concern that violent attacks against lawyers, many of which have been credibly attributed to extreme right-wing groups, often result in impunity of the perpetrators, despite evidence and despite specific provisions in the criminal law which protect lawyers against attacks.

The ICJ heard that the law enforcement bodies often fail to investigate these cases in a prompt and impartial manner even where the identity of perpetrators is known.

The ICJ stresses that these attacks on lawyers, which are often related to the defence of clients in politically sensitive criminal cases, undermine the ability of lawyers to exercise their duties and protect the human rights of their clients, free from intimidation, hindrance, harassment or improper interference.

Furthermore, the ICJ recalls that under international human rights law, the State must take steps to protect the security of persons who the authorities know or ought to know are under threat, and they must ensure an independent, prompt, and thorough investigation of any attacks on the life or physical integrity of individuals.

In this regard, the ICJ stresses that a well-functioning, independent legal profession is essential to any justice system that upholds the rule of law. International standards recognize the importance of lawyers in protecting human rights and the contribution they make to maintaining the rule of law and the fair administration of justice.

The UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers emphasize the importance of the independence of bar associations in ensuring the fair and effective administration of justice. Such associations must be institutionally independent, both in law and in practice, from all external actors, including the government, other executive agencies, parliaments and outside private interests.

In light of these standards, the ICJ is concerned about the process of adoption of draft law No 9055 “On the Bar Association and Lawyers’ Activity”, which was drafted without the necessary level of consultation and participation of a main stakeholder, the National Bar Association of Ukraine, which strongly opposes it.

It is unacceptable that in this context the draft law had been submitted to the Parliament through an urgent procedure, the need for which appears to be dubious, the ICJ says.

If adopted without the necessary consultation and endorsement by the Bar Association, this law may pose a threat to the independence of the legal profession in Ukraine and the capacity of civil society, including human rights defenders, to carry out their critical work, the Geneva-based organization adds.

The ICJ is particularly concerned that according to the draft law, lawyers would not be able to be employed by NGOs while being members of the Bar Association.

While international practice may differ, in the context of Ukraine specifically, this may undermine the ability of human rights NGOs to provide qualified legal representation or assistance to those whose human rights have been violated.

The ICJ further noted consistent allegations of corruption and lack of integrity of lawyers including in the context of legal aid system.

It also appears that the examination process for qualification as a lawyer, especially in some regions, is not free from corruption. Until now, the Bar Association has not been able to effectively resolve this problem which must be addressed as a matter of urgency.

The mission to Ukraine included members of the ICJ Secretariat as well as representatives of the Amsterdam and Geneva Bar Associations. It met with leading human rights NGOs, IGOs, the members of the Ukrainian National Bar Association as well as representatives of the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine.

The ICJ wishes to thank all those whom its representatives met in Kyiv. A final report based on the key findings of the mission will be published later this year.

Kazakhstan: frivolous disbarment proceedings against prominent lawyer Sergey Sizintsev should be immediately dropped, ICJ says

Kazakhstan: frivolous disbarment proceedings against prominent lawyer Sergey Sizintsev should be immediately dropped, ICJ says

Today, the ICJ expressed concern at the initiation of disbarment proceedings by the Ministry of Justice of Kazakhstan against Sergey Sizintsev, former Executive Director of the National Bar Association and the newly-elected head of the Scientific-Consultative Board of the National Bar Association. 

The official ground for disbarment of Sizintsev is his work as the Director the National Bar Association in 2016-2018 while continuing his legal practice at the same time.

On his facebook public account, however, Sizintsev alleged that this initiative is not related to the officially stated grounds, and that in fact continuing to practice while working as Director of the Bar Association is clearly permitted by the Kazakhstan’s law. Rather, he alleges, he is being pursued for his criticism of the law “On lawyers’ activity and legal aid” as well as his public statements in different international and national fora in regard to issues related to the independence of the legal profession.

The ICJ recalls that freedom of expression and association, in particular, constitute essential requirements for the proper and independent functioning of the legal profession and must be guaranteed by law and in practice.

According to Principle 23 of the UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers, lawyers “[…] have the right to take part in public discussion of matters concerning the law, the administration of justice and the promotion and protection of human rights and to join or form local, national or international organizations and attend their meetings, without suffering professional restrictions by reason of their lawful action or their membership in a lawful organization. In exercising these rights, lawyers shall always conduct themselves in accordance with the law and the recognized standards and ethics of the legal profession.”

Sergey Sizintsev as Executive Director of the National Bar Association and as a member of the Parliament working group on the Law on Lawyers’ Activities, was expected to voice concerns of members of the legal position including on the new law which the legal profession consider to be restrictive.

Moreover, his position demanded that he expresses his position on behalf of the National Bar Association including to draw attention to legislative developments which can jeopardise the independence of the legal profession in Kazakhstan.

The ICJ is concerned that this initiative appears to constitute an attack on the independence of lawyers in Kazakhstan and may have a chilling effect on members of the legal profession.

The ICJ therefore calls on the Ministry of Justice to end this lawsuit immediately.

The ICJ will closely follow the case of Sergei Sizintsev and the proceedings at the Rayon Court in Petropavlovsk.

In December 2017, the ICJ organized a mission to Kazakhstan and raised concerns over the then planned reform.

In November 2018, the ICJ raised concern at the disbarment proceedings against Presidents of Aktybinsk and Pavlodar Bar Association as well as resignation of Anuar Tugel, the President of the National Bar Association of Kazakhstan, allegedly as a result of the pressure from the Ministry of Justice.

Azerbaijan: lawyer Sadigov should be applauded, not sanctioned, for acting professionally

Azerbaijan: lawyer Sadigov should be applauded, not sanctioned, for acting professionally

Today, the ICJ expressed concern at the disciplinary proceedings against lawyer Elchin Sadigov who was sanctioned with a reprimand on 25 February 2019 by the Presidium of the Bar Association of Azerbaijan.

The ICJ called on the Bar Association to reverse this sanction and take measures to end interference with the independent exercise of the representation of victims of human rights violations.

The decision to hold the lawyer accountable for actions taken in accordance with professional ethics and responsibilities jeopardizes the independence of lawyers and their capacity to protect human rights, and is likely to have a chilling effect on the independent exercise of lawyers’ duties in Azerbaijan, the ICJ said.

Elchin Sadigov represented Yunis Safarov, who was charged with the attempted murder of Elmar Valiyev, former mayor of Ganja City in Azerbaijan. According to Sadigov, he informed his client in a confidential conversation in detention, of the right to complain about torture or ill treatment.

Shortly afterwards, he was told that he had violated the law by persuading his client to complain about the ill-treatment which, the Prosecutor General’s Office officials “decided” in an official document, never took place.

On 5 September 2018, the Prosecutor General’s Office removed Elchin Sadigov as Safarov’s representative and complained to the Bar Association, seeking disciplinary action against the lawyer, among others, on the basis of “[…] creating false grounds to file a complaint to the European Court of Human Rights […], clearly knowing that it is not true, proposed his client to complain about torture inflicted by the police and investigative authorities, despite the fact that the accused told him that he had not been tortured, Sadigov continued psychological influence on his client again – as if he had been tortured – to refuse giving testimony, to refuse services of the State appointed lawyer […]”.

The complaint referred to the confidential conversation between the lawyer and his client, which was apparently overheard and possibly recorded by law enforcement officials. It also refers to a letter which appeared during the disciplinary proceedings, in which Sadigov’s client complained that his lawyer had tried to convince him to complain about use of torture in custody.

According to Elchin Sadigov, however, this letter may have been signed by his former client under pressure from the detention authorities.

 

The ICJ recalls that according to the UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers, it is indispensable that lawyers “always loyally respect the interests of their clients.”

The Principles specify that they assist their clients “in every appropriate way, and taking legal action to protect their interests”. In the present case, as submitted by Elchin Sadigov and evident from the publicly available materials including photos and videos of Safarov with clear and multiple signs of severe beatings, the lawyer had every reason to believe that his client had been subjected to torture and ill treatment in custody.

Therefore, he had not only the right, but an affirmative professional duty to advise his client to use available remedies for this violation of human rights through procedural means such as a complaint. A failure to do this would be a breach of professional ethics and duties on the part of the lawyer as a trusted representative of his client. The ICJ is concerned that in this case a lawyer was held accountable for attempting to discuss with his client, in a confidential manner, issues related to the human rights of his client.

The ICJ is furthermore concerned that the principle of lawyer-client confidentiality has been violated in this case.

This principle is a fundamental component of the right to a fair trial, as protected under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the European Convention of Human Rights, to both of which Azerbaijan is a party.

According to the UN Basic Principles on the role of lawyers “[a]ll arrested, detained or imprisoned persons shall be provided with adequate opportunities, time and facilities to be visited by and to communicate and consult with a lawyer, without delay, interception or censorship and in full confidentiality…”

The ICJ is also concerned that lawyer Sadigov’s conversations may have been monitored in violation of the guarantees of professional secrecy with his client and contrary to international law and national procedure.

The ICJ considers it essential that the Bar Association send a strong signal in support of independent lawyers by lifting the sanction against lawyer Sadigov and consider legislative and practical improvements to ensure that confidentially of lawyers and their clients in detention is effectively guaranteed in practice.

Azerbaijan-Statement Sadigov-News-web stories (full story with additional information, in PDF)

 

On video: human rights defenders and the rule of law in Turkey – UN side event

On video: human rights defenders and the rule of law in Turkey – UN side event

This event took place today at the Palais des Nations, United Nations, in Geneva. Watch it on video.

The situation of the rule of law in Turkey and of human rights defenders who promote it continues to be of serious concern. 

Following the attempted coup of 15 July 2016, the two-year state of emergency and security legislation enacted thereafter, human rights defenders face harassment and are subject to pressure by authorities, including by unfounded criminal charges of terrorist offenses. Lack of accountability for gross violations of the rights of human rights defenders is also a particular problem. 

The panel discussion at this side event will also focus on the situation of human rights defenders for the rule of law in Turkey and the lack of accountability for human rights violations against them, including for the killing of the head of the Bar Association of Diyarbakir three years ago.

The event is organized by the ICJ jointly with the International Bar Association’s Human Rights Institute.

Speakers:

– Michel Forst, UN Special Rapporteur on human rights defenders

– Feray Salman, Coordinator of the Human Rights Joint Platform (IHOP)

– Kerem Altiparmak, ICJ Legal Consultant

– Jurate Guzeviciute, International Bar Association’s Human Rights Institute

Chair:

Saman Zia-Zarifi, ICJ Secretary General

Event Flyer:

Turkey- HRD side event HRC40-News-Events-2019-ENG

https://www.facebook.com/ridhglobal/videos/795507517477571/

 

 

Italy: blocking investigation of Matteo Salvini would undermine the rule of law, urges ICJ

Italy: blocking investigation of Matteo Salvini would undermine the rule of law, urges ICJ

The ICJ today called for the Italian Senate to allow for the investigation of the Minister of Interior and Vice-President of the Council of Ministers, Matteo Salvini, for his role in the alleged arbitrary deprivation of liberty of some 177 persons, including potential refugees, held for five days on the “U-Diciotti” boat last summer.

The ICJ said that the Italian Senate’s Commission on Elections and Immunities should recommend the authorization of the criminal investigation to the full Senate, where Matteo Salvini also sits as a Senator.

“The decision on investigation of gross human rights violations such as mass and arbitrary deprivation of liberty should not be subject to political scrutiny but be left to the assessment of the judiciary,” said Massimo Frigo, Senior Legal Adviser for the ICJ Europe Programme.

The indictment for “kidnapping” against Minister Salvini has already been approved at the judicial stage by the Tribunal of Ministers of Catania, which affirmed that Minister Salvini is alleged to have abused his administrative power in this matter for the political goal of negotiating resettlements with other European countries.

“No human being should effectively be made hostage for the purpose of political negotiations,” said Massimo Frigo.

“It does not matter which country may have been primarily responsible for the rescue at sea. No authority may arbitrarily restrict of the right to liberty of 177 human beings,” he added.

The ICJ considers that it is highly problematic for the principle of the rule of law that the decision on prosecution for a crime underlying a gross violation of human rights, such as kidnapping, be entrusted to a political body.

This decision should be left to the judiciary based on legal and not political grounds.

Under international human rights law, including the European Convention on Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, States have an obligation to investigate, prosecute, try and, if found guilty, convict persons responsible of gross violations of human rights, among which counts the arbitrary deprivation of liberty.

This applies to all State officials, irrespective of their position of authority.

Contact

Massimo Frigo, ICJ Senior Legal Adviser, t: +41 22 979 38 05 ; e: massimo.frigo(a)icj.org

 Background

The Italian “U. Diciotti” boat was at the centre of a political scandal last August when the Minister of Interior Matteo Salvini refused disembarkation of 177 people for several days in order to negotiate their resettlement with other European countries.

While the boat entered Italian waters on 20 August, they were eventually disembarked in the night between Saturday 25 and Sunday 26 August after some countries and the catholic church made some nominal declaration of resettlement or reception.

Minister Salvini was later accused of “kidnapping” for having arbitrarily deprived of their liberty the 177 persons on board the “U.Diciotti”. While the prosecutor in the case asked for the dismissal of the charges, the Tribunal of Ministers, composed of ordinary judges, that is responsible for the legal assessment of the indictment, held the indictment to be in accordance with the law and that sufficient suspicion existed to warrant an investigation.

According to article 96 of the Constitution and articles 8-9 of the Constitutional Law no. 1 of 16 January 1989, it is up to the Parliament  to authorize the investigation and prosecution of a Minister. The decision would therefore be up to the Senate in the case of Minister Salvini, as he is a Senator. The Senate may refuse by absolute majority, if it considers “that the person has acted for the protection of a State interest that is constitutionally relevant or for the pursuance of a preminent public interest in the function of Government” (unofficial translation). No appeal is possible against this decision.

Reportedly, the President of the Council of Ministers, Giuseppe Conte, the Vice-President of the Council of Ministers, Luigi Di Maio, and the Minister Danilo Toninelli, have submitted observations to the Senate’s Committee holding that the decision in the case was the reflecting the line of the whole Government and not only of the Minister of Interior.

Translate »